A debate topic for general discussion (based on a comment from a friend)

"Resolved -- Tichu would have more interesting cardplay if all straights had to be exactly five cards." (Feel free to add the addendum that running pairs must have exactly four cards).

It makes it easier to go out, obviously. Much easier to play a 7 card straight than to play a 5 card straight and two singles.

It's not as if it's particularly easy to go out as it is.

-MMM

Anyone who is really interested in this question should just try Gang of Four.

Personally, I heartily dislike straight limits, I find that being able to play longer ones can often be the difference between having an OK hand, and a downright wretched one, and the inability to play them means that more hands tend to devolve into singleton card play. I imagine this would be even worse in Tichu than it is in Gang of Four, because there are no flushes in Tichu.

Hm, perhaps you've never been forced to decide whether to break your 7-card straight to beat a 6-card straight...

5 card straights would leave a lot of singles play. I am not so sure that would be a good thing.

What would be the benefit? you would end up with a lot of junk in your hand how is that more interesting?

-M

What do they add to the game?

The threat/tension that anyone can go out in a
single play, regardless of their hand
size. (A bomb can be overbombed, so a
handful of bombs doesn't count.)

Plus they add to the decisions in how to
play your hand.

Ack! I would most strenuoously disagree with the claim that limiting straights to 5 would be more interesting. I haven't tried it, but I've played a lot of Tichu and have a pretty good imagination.

Choosing cards to pass, for example, are often based on the possibility of extending a straight. Perhaps most importantly, 5 cards straights are extremely common, so adding length also adds strength, an important dimension orthoganal to rank. Just like a pair is stronger than a singleton, and a triple is stronger than a pair. This also creates interesting situations where those holding a longer straight could play on a shorter straight, or hold out until they can play the whole straight. These kind of decisions are what make Tichu interesting.

Taking this to its logical extreme, you could say all cards must be played as singletons, and then it's simply a matter of who has the better hand. But most options of how to play a hand is what makes things interesting. Granted, the other extreme of even more options would also be a problem. I for one would say that the balance in Tichu is exactly right as is. Same for sequence of pairs.

But really, I just don't understand the motivation behind the original claim. Maybe some example about why your firend think Tichu would be more interesting with the extra limitation would help me understand where (s)he's coming from.

This person is most likely coming from a background of Big Two or Gang of Four - climbing games in which a single 'lead type' is a 'five card set' - one that can be any one of (and be followed by any higher-ranked of) a straight, a flush, a full house, (in Big Two only - a 4-of-a-kind plus any singleton on the side), or a straight-flush.

It would add some hard predictability to a hand - the fact that a single lead cannot constitute more than 5 cards. The question is, is that predictability preferred? For me, it's an absolute no. For me, I don't like the thought that 23456789T is but one straight and four unmatched singles. It's not the biggest failing of B2/Go4 though. I fear the next question will be a resolution about a ranked suit order.

This has got to be the silliest game variant ever.

The specific complaint is that a large straight (say 7 or 8 cards) is much less interesting in Tichu than if you had to deal with it as 5 + X singles, and that it makes planning difficult if a moderate to high five card straight can be moved around by having a seven card straight.

A specific example is discussed here http://saboardgamers.blogspot.com/2007/08/i-will-stage-no-mo...

The gist is that handling straights (in cardplay) is more interesting when you only have 5 card straights.

After seeing all the arguments, I find your thoughts above most compelling. (Anything that reduces the 'distance' between the great hands and the poor ones is a net positive). Many of the arguments (on both sides) seem reasonable, but this outweighs. Of course, its partially a matter of taste.

I summarized from the various threads (including this one) at my blog.

http://gaming.powerblogs.com/posts/1186609774.shtml

Hey - what about the ability to go out with a 14 card straight? (Mahjong through ace)

Got to do it once - and let me tell you, NO 5 card straight will EVER feel that good to play!!!

Be that as it may, I don't think that counts as an 'interesting card play decision.' Much like Yao Ming taking up basketball instead of gymnastics...

Nice summary. After judging it for myself I am definitely in the "keep it the way it is" camp.

No, but deciding whether or not to break up pairs/trips to give cards to your partner and opponents, to leave you in a position whereby if they give you back the right cards in order to have that 14 card straight - that's the interesting decision.


Getting A,2,3 from your partner/opponents is not entirely uncommon.

If you have, 1456789TJJQKKA, do you want to give AJK to partner and opponents, to hope you'll get A23?
What if you have 1456789TJQQKKA? do you want to split up the laddered pairs? Or, if you have 1456789TJQQKAA - do you want to give an opponent an Ace?

If you had to have 5 cards in a straight, that affects your decision quite a lot. And that's the point where it is an "interesting card play decision".